Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
Community Proposals
Community Proposals
tag:snake search within a tag
answers:0 unanswered questions
user:xxxx search by author id
score:0.5 posts with 0.5+ score
"snake oil" exact phrase
votes:4 posts with 4+ votes
created:<1w created < 1 week ago
post_type:xxxx type of post
Search help
Notifications
Mark all as read See all your notifications »
Meta

Welcome to Software Development on Codidact!

Will you help us build our independent community of developers helping developers? We're small and trying to grow. We welcome questions about all aspects of software development, from design to code to QA and more. Got questions? Got answers? Got code you'd like someone to review? Please join us.

Comments on How are we supposed to give feedback for poor questions if such comments are deleted?

Parent

How are we supposed to give feedback for poor questions if such comments are deleted?

+6
−1

The question https://software.codidact.com/posts/281517 is currently voted at -3. I wrote several comments to explain why, so the author can hopefully ask better questions in the future.

This morning, I found all but the first of these comments deleted without warning.

Alexei gave the following reason:

I have removed the comments that are not relevant. Please use comments to ask for clarifications or generally speaking, to improve the question.

Taken literally, this means that we are not allowed to tell people why a question is downvoted, because that's neither a clarification, nor intended to improve this question.

How are people supposed to learn how to ask better questions if we are not allowed to give them feedback?

Also, I spent quite a bit of time writing these comments, which is now wasted. If you disagree with my comments, could you ask me about them before deleting them?

History
Why does this post require attention from curators or moderators?
You might want to add some details to your flag.
Why should this post be closed?

1 comment thread

General comments (6 comments)
Post
+9
−1

I remember reading @meriton's comments on that question and thinking they were good feedback; if I hadn't seen them there, I would have written something similar.

This is also an argument against making question feedback private: which is more likely to make people feel defensive, receiving public criticism from one person or being dog-piled privately by six? With public feedback, I can see that what needs to be said has been, and there's no need to join in (although it would be nice to be able to upvote comments that I cosign, rather than saying it with complicit silence).

Good feedback often involves some argumentation, and arguments can be digressive as the reasons behind viewpoints get explored. This is a good thing; forbidding digressive argumentation would limit both the feedback we can give to posters and what we can learn from them as feedback-givers.

Having a policy of cleaning up digressive comment threads eventually would make some amount of sense—anything we want preserved should end up as an edit to actual content, after all. But the threads need to survive long enough for the discussion about what to do with the content to reach some level of consensus (or recognition that consensus can't be reached, which results in either the commenter being ignored or the question being closed). One day is much too short to assume that this has been accomplished, in my opinion.

So in summary:

  • I think question feedback should be delivered in public comments (the status quo).
  • It would be nice if those comments could be upvoted.
  • The feedback is allowed to be digressive while consensus is pursued.
  • The feedback should persist for a period of time sufficient to reach consensus.
  • I don't know exactly what that period of time should be, but I think it's longer than one day.
  • After that period of time, digressive comments can be deleted.
History
Why does this post require attention from curators or moderators?
You might want to add some details to your flag.

1 comment thread

General comments (5 comments)
General comments
Alexei‭ wrote over 3 years ago

Thank you for providing this answer. I will soon ask a question on meta about how to add comments (what is OK and what is not OK) so that the community can reach a consensus about this topic. Anyway, I agree that being digressive is sometimes necessary.

Lundin‭ wrote over 3 years ago

"or being dog-piled privately by six" The way SO does it: get down votes, wait a few minutes, get the first public comment, wait a few minutes, more negative comments, wait a few minutes, close/down votes keep coming, wait a few minutes, lots of negative comments half of them repeating what's already been said, wait a few minutes, question closed and heavily down-voted. And then the question still sits there attracting nothing but more negative attention. I can't think of a much worse system.

Lundin‭ wrote over 3 years ago

There's yet another aspect to keeping comments in private. A whole lot of users don't want to be moderators. They don't want to teach random people on the Internet how to spell, how communicate with other humans, how to use the site and so on. They just want the crappy post gone from "their" site. So it's in everyone's best interest if the bad question is removed as swiftly as possible to minimize friction and drama. This is much more important than salvaging bad questions.

Lundin‭ wrote over 3 years ago

"I can see that what needs to be said has been, and there's no need to join in" We could also move all feedback to a special tab which you only visit in case you are actually interested in helping the OP.

r~~‭ wrote over 3 years ago

@Lundin, I'm not sure I understand you. ‘The way SO does it:’ Are you making the argument that the dog-piling happens regardless of whether the comments are public, and that making them private can't make that worse? I don't see how anything on SE is evidence of the second part of that claim, if so. ‘This [frictionlessly removing bad questions] is much more important than salvaging bad questions.’ Is this your POV, or the POV of some hypothetical user?